SPC Women in Fisheries Information Bulletin #21 – December 2010 3

Gender and seaweed farming on , in Mecki Kronen,1 Alex Meloti,2 Ben Ponia,3 Tim Pickering,4 Sylvester Diake,2 Jesse Kama,2 Peter Kenilolerie,2 James Ngwaerobo2 and Antoine Teitelbaum4

Summary

A field survey on the socio-economic dimensions of seaweed farming was carried out on Wagina Island, Choiseul Province in Solomon Islands. Given the geographical and socio-economic conditions, seaweed farming on Wagina was found to be a viable, non gender-based income option, with women having equal chances to benefit from the cash revenues sourced from this aquaculture.

Results from a survey of 58 households (28% of all households), 40 of which were engaged in seaweed farming, showed that (a) the average annual cash income for seaweed farming households was about 52% higher (surplus of SI$10,400) than non seaweed farming households; (b) members, particularly men, of more than half of all households surveyed have either abandoned or reduced their finfishing and bêche-de- mer (and trochus) fishing; (c) 38% of all respondents believe that seaweed has improved social networking and social services in the community.

Seaweed farming was found to be essentially a family enterprise although men accounted for most (68% of total annual labour) of the annual labour input. Women and men contribute similar amounts of labour to most processes in seaweed production. A positive and statistically significant correlation was found be- tween the number of women per household participating in seaweed farming and the household’s rev- enues from this income source.

A number of issues, including women’s roles as mothers and child educators, and certain environmental, financial and managerial problems, are highlighted and need to be addressed, to assess the future sustain- ability of seaweed farming on Wagina, and possibly in other communities in Solomon Islands.

1. Introduction and junior staff members from the Aquaculture Section of the Solomon Islands Ministry of Fish- 1.1 Objectives and background eries and Marine Resources (MFMR), a socio- economist fisheries consultant, village elders and The central aim of this paper was to demonstrate a former project leader of the European Union the gender-related effects of seaweed farming. funded Commercialisation of Seaweed Produc- This topic was one of numerous socio-economic tion in Solomon Islands (CoSPSI) Project. The and institutional elements addressed in a compre- survey was financed by FAO in cooperation with hensive evaluation of the socio-economic dimen- the Secretariat of the Pacific Community’s (SPC) sions of seaweed farming in Solomon Islands, Aquaculture Section. as part of a Food and Agricultural Organization (FAO) global review (Kronen et al. 2010). The Wa- Further results obtained in the framework of the gina seaweed farming community in Choiseul socio-economic survey have been used to provide Province, one of the four major seaweed produc- background information on geographic, demo- tion areas in Solomon Islands, was selected for an graphic and socioeconomic conditions on Wagina, in-depth field survey in November 2009 (Figure and on the historic development of seaweed farm- 1). Members of the survey team included senior ing in Solomon Islands.

1 Délégation de la Commission européenne en Nouvelle-Calédonie, BP 1100, 98845 Nouméa, Nouvelle-Calédonie. Email: [email protected]. 2 Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources, Aquaculture, , Solomon Islands. 3 Ministry of Marine Resourses, PO Box 85, Rarotonga, Cook Islands. 4 Secretariat of the Pacific Community, BP D5, 98848 Nouméa, New Caledonia. 4 SPC Women in Fisheries Information Bulletin #21 – December 2010 — — 155° E 160° E

— 5° S Frindsbury Ontong Java

B o PAPUA u g a NEW in Roncador v GUINEA ille Oema Wagina Bradley Reefs CHOISEU L Fauro Alu Sasamungga Mono Kia Vella Solomon Islands Lavella New SANTA ISABEL Dai New Geor Buala Vona Vona G eorgia gia Sound I n d Munda i s p Rendova e San n s Leli Jorge a Tetepare b Auki Mbulo le

Russell Islands

S t ra HONIARA it Maramasike Ulawa S A — 10° S NT 10° S — Ugi Three A Sisters C R Kirakira U Z Ndende Tomotu Noi IS L A Bellona N D Rennell Tevai S SOL O M O N S E A Fataka

Introduction and dissemination of seaweed production sites between 1988 and 2009 Potential seaweed production sites in the Solomon Islands 0 Kilometres 300

160° E 165° E 170° E — — —

Figure 1. Location of Wagina, and existing and future possible seaweed farming sites in Solomon Islands

1.2 Wagina’s cultural and demographic features largest, Tengangea-Kukutin (about 600 people), followed by Aririki (about 400) and Nikumaroro Solomon Islands are believed to have been inhab- (about 390). While Tengangea-Kukutin – often re- ited by Melanesian people for thousands of years. ferred to as Kukutin – is Catholic, the people of Ara- In the 1890s, the United Kingdom established a riki and Nikomaroro belong to the United Church. protectorate over Solomon Islands. The British ad- The two communities of Tengangea-Kukutin and ministration resettled people from the overcrowded Arariki are adjacent to each other, while Nikumaro- Gilbert Islands (Kiribati) to the islands of Wagina ro is located further to the east on the island. and Titiana in Western Solomons during the 1950s and 1960s. By 1980, these people and their descend- Based on the socio-economic survey results, using ants numbered around 3000. fully-structured, closed questionnaires, and includ- ing 58 households, the average household size is The 2009 census indicates that the total population large, ranging from six to eight people, and today, of Wagina may not exceed 1500 people. The island most households in the three communities are en- population is divided into three communities, the gaged in seaweed farming (69%) (Table 1).

Table 1. Sampling details of socio-economic survey undertaken in Wagina, Solomon Islands

Arariki Tengangea/Kukutin Nikumaroro Wagina

Data (estimated) from 2009 census Total number of households 70 79 60 209

Data from FAO seaweed socio-economic survey November 2009 Number of households surveyed 19 22 17 58 Number of seaweed farming households (surveyed) 14 14 12 40 Number of non-seaweed farming households (surveyed) 5 8 5 18 Average household size (surveyed) 6 8 7 7 Total population estimated 399 593 390 1382 Total population surveyed 108 164 110 382 Population and household survey sample (%) 27 28 28 28 SPC Women in Fisheries Information Bulletin #21 – December 2010 5 1.3 Access to resources and income cal, environmental and socio-economic conditions necessary for seaweed farming, this activity is pos- The Gilbertese people of Wagina and a number of sible and likely to be economically viable in several communities from Santa Isabel and Choisol have ac- areas in Solomon Islands. cess to the islands of the Arnavon Marine Conserva- tion Area (AMCA), which lies midway between the Seaweed was first farmed in Solomon Islands in islands of Santa Isabel and Choiseul. The creation 1988 by the UK Overseas Development Agency of AMCA began in 1995 with support from the Na- (ODA) at Vona Vona Lagoon and Rarumana village ture Conservancy (The Nature Conservancy 1998) in the Western Province using Kappaphycus alvar- to preserve diverse marine resources, including ezii imported from Fiji (Tiroba and McHugh 2006). bêche-de-mer, other invertebrates and key species, In 2000, Solomon Islands Aquaculture Division of all subject to increasing “boom and bust” cycles of the Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources harvesting since the 1980s. The islands are for in- (MFMR) collected seed stocks remaining from the stance the most important rookery in the western 1988 growth trials in Vona Vona Lagoon, and used Pacific for the endangered Hawksbill sea turtle and these to start growth trials in Rarumana. home to one of the world’s largest nesting popula- tions of this species (SPC 1996). The management Towards the end (2000) of the European Union plan for AMCA included the provision of viable al- funded Rural Fisheries Enterprise Project (started ternative marine enterprises. in 1994), which aimed to link the fisheries centres established earlier with Japanese aid in four prov- Alternative income opportunities for people liv- inces, seaweed farming was considered an option ing on Wagina are limited. Copra production is no for these centres. This initiative was unsuccessful, longer viable. Bêche-de-mer resources are consid- because the location of fisheries centres was unsuit- ered exhausted in the close vicinity of the island, able for seaweed production. The idea was again and no longer provide a reliable or promising in- taken up by the CoSPSI Project. Favourable physi- come source. Income from fisheries is restricted cal conditions, and the existence of the fishery cen- to finfish and lobster tails, which are exported to tre on Wagina, enabled the building of a seaweed Honiara. Survey respondents reported that the warehouse in 2004 on the island to provide stor- total catch and average size of lobsters harvested age facilities, and to help market the seaweed. The had decreased visibly over time. Respondents be- People First Network (PFnet) broadband, e-mail lieved that the resource would be exhausted within system enabled communication between producers the next years. While a total weekly production of and buyers. 300 kg of lobster tails was still possible at the be- ginning of 2000, today’s catch was reported to be In 2005 about 130 seaweed farmers were working down to about 40 to 50 kg per week. The lobster in Rarumana and the Shortland Islands (Western operations are linked with spear diving finfishing Province) and another 300 were working on Wagi- groups. Speardivers and other fishing groups sell na. Seaweed farming had also expanded to Malaita their catch to the fishery centre which has been pri- Provine and Makira-Ulawa Province. About seven vately operated since October 2009. The centre buys export licences were approved, although only one about 400 to 500 cleaned or filleted finfish from local was renewed in 2006. This licence holder is now the fishers for fortnightly export to Honiara using the sole current seaweed exporter in Solomon Islands. inter-island cargo boat service. Seaweed is a low-value product and therefore sen- Other local income opportunities are restricted to sitive to beach prices, international market devel- a few small island stores, a few people receiving opments and production costs, notably transport salaries from government and church services, and costs. The relationship between costs and prices, the occasional selling of handicrafts (mats), garden access to alternative sources, financially more at- produce or pigs. The survey showed that only one tractive sources of income (in Wagina particularly couple on the island gained their main income from the opening and closing of the bêche-de-mer fish- gardening. ery), losses due to fish grazing, outbreaks of the filamenteous epiphyte Polysophonia, or ‘ice-ice’ 1.4 Seaweed farming in the Solomon Islands and caused by stress due to poor salinity and high wa- on Wagina ter temperatures, and loss of production sites due to sedimentation effects after a tsunami, explain Seaweed farming is regarded as one possible al- the sharp fluctuations in national seaweed produc- ternative source of income, which would reduce tion between 2003 and 2009. During this period, pressure on wild caught coastal resources in remote annual production and export volumes fluctu- rural coastal communities with few income oppor- ated between a minimum annual production of 40 tunities, but serviced at reasonable frequency and tonnes and a maximum annual production of 400 cost by inter-cargo boat services. Given the physi- tonnes of dried seaweed. 6 SPC Women in Fisheries Information Bulletin #21 – December 2010 2. Results Most believed that seaweed has triggered positive competition among farmers and families. 2.1 Increased cash income Some (17%) respondents indicated an increase in jeal- One major finding from the socio-economic survey ousy, and complained about people stealing ropes, in Wagina is that seaweed farming households gain seaweed and other materials. However, overall such on average about 52% (SI$10,400 per year) more negative effects associated with the production of cash income than those households that do not par- seaweed were not considered to be major issues. ticipate. Income from seaweed accounts on aver- age for 42.5% of a farming household’s total annual 2.4 Labour requirements and gender cash revenue. The life improvements such as bet- participation ter food, and food security, made possible by this increased income, are the most important changes Seaweed farming is done as a family enterprise and for households farming seaweed, as well as a focus includes women, men and children. However, men on seaweed farming rather than other household account for most of the reported annual working responsibilities, or gardening. time, i.e. 68% compared with women (32% of total annual working time). As shown in Figure 2, on av- 2.2 Impacts on coastal resource exploitation erage women invest about half of the annual time needed for harvesting, replanting and maintenance, While most respondents believe that the responsi- and drying compared with men, however, men are bilities and activities of their household members mainly responsible for packing and selling. have not changed with seaweed farming, the reduc- tion or abandonment of finfishing and bêche-de- On average, most of the time invested by men in mer fishing were reported by over half (53.7%) of seaweed farming is dedicated to replanting and all seaweed farming households. Reduced fisheries maintenance (36%) and harvesting (32%) (Fig. 3). activities applied mostly to men rather than women Time spent drying and packaging account for 15%– (Table 2). 16% of total annual labour. Least time is required for selling (1%). 2.3 Social changes at community level Similarly, most of the time invested by women in Respondents reported a variety of perceptions of seaweed farming is dedicated to replanting and change in community social structures and insti- maintenance (40%) and harvesting (34%) (Fig. 4). tutions as a result of seaweed farming. More than Time spent drying and selling is also similar to half (57%) of those interviewed generally reported that of men (16% and 1% respectively) while only no major change. Social networking, and a tight 10% of the total annual labour of women is spent family system with expectations of mutual support in packaging. were considered traditional values, and these have persisted since seaweed farming began on Wagina. The importance of gender in seaweed farming is However, 38% of respondents thought that sea- highlighted by the positive and statistically sig- weed had improved social networking, contributed nificant relationship between the total number of to the formation of stronger groups of families shar- women in a seaweed producing household and its ing the same interest, and at times even resulted in annual income – the more women, the higher the families operating more independently. Frequently, income, pinpointing the important contribution of improvement of social services in the community, women to the annual household income in this sec- including school, church and youth was quoted. tor (Fig. 5).

Table 2. Changes in personal activities with the introduction of seaweed farming.

Activities have been Numbers of fishers reduced by: concerned

100% 75% 50% 25% Men Women

Finfishing (% of households) 30 9 39 22 33 5

Bêche-de-mer and/or trochus (% of households) 30 22 26 22 41 5 SPC Women in Fisheries Information Bulletin #21 – December 2010 7

1000 men women

ear 800

600

400

Numer of hours per y 200

0 harvesting replanting & drying packaging selling maintenance

Figure 2. Total annual hours spent by gender and activity in seaweed farming

selling, 1% selling, 1% packaging, packaging, 10% 15% harvesting, harvesting, 34% 32% drying, 16% drying, 16%

replanting & replanting & maintenance, maintenance, 36% 40%

Figure 3. Men’s annual work (%) input Figure 4. Women’s annual work input in seaweed farming activities in seaweed farming activities

6

5

4 from seaweed ) -1 3 y = 0.6779x + 3.8474

year 2

-1 R = 0.20** 2

1

Log (SID HH 0 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2

Log (number of women)

Figure 5. The relationship between total number of women per household (HH) and total annual income per household (SID/HH) from seaweed farming 8 SPC Women in Fisheries Information Bulletin #21 – December 2010 2.5 Distribution and allocation of cash revenues from seaweed farming wife Although comparable amounts of time are spent on selling seaweed, in most husband cases (45%) women, or both partners (35%) receive the cash rather than men both (20%) (Figure 6). 0 10 20 30 40 50 All respondents (100%) agreed that % of respondents cash revenues from seaweed farming served to cover household expenditure Figure 6. Recipients of cash from seaweed sale and living costs. However, answers on its use for covering operational and future investment costs for seaweed farming were Seaweed farming is an income option for rural more reluctant (92.5%), and less frequent. More coastal communities with little cash flow and capi- than three-quarters of all households (77.5%) also tal. Thus the need for motorised boat transport to use these cash revenues to cover social and church reach farming sites and to transport harvests to sell- contributions, which is consistent with the general ing points will continue to be a problem. Seaweed perception that seaweed has improved social serv- farmers need to reach a considerable level of pro- ices in the community. duction (> 3 tonnes/month) before the individual purchase and maintenance of motorised boat trans- 2.6 Benefits and future potential of seaweed port was an option. Community owned transport of farming for the community as perceived by this kind, which could be made available on a loan individual households or fee system, or by agents charging for the provi- sion of transport of harvest to selling points may be In summary, 45.5% of respondents from seaweed possible solutions. farming households were convinced that this ac- quaculture made a helpful financial contribution Further problems voiced included unfair distribu- to livelihoods, meeting living costs, school fees and tion of farming materials provided free-of-charge by other financial obligations. Seaweed farming in- the seaweed project, lack of water tanks on islands creased income (27.5% of respondents), to provide where farms are established, increased frequency of a better and regular cash flow than other options sickness among farmers, particularly pneumonia, (10%), it was considered easy to operate (5%), pro- and the stealing of ropes and seaweed. Other prob- viding a future for households (17.5%), and was lems observed concerned the cutting down of local considered an environmentally friendly activity mangroves and native trees to obtain the necessary (2.5%). materials for pegs, poles, and drying tables.

All respondents emphasised that seaweed farming The fact that seaweed farming was introduced in helped the community to pay for the needs of daily Solomon Islands within the framework of techni- life, increased cooperation, strengthened unity in cal cooperation projects and governmental aid, fur- the community and, indeed, was seen as the future nishing materials, seedlings and training all free of for the community. Only a few respondents (5.2%), charge to farmers may have contributed to the lack however, mentioned the participation of women in of financial management by farmers. Rural popula- particular, in income generating activities. tions have had little need to develop financial man- agement skills in general, however, as livelihoods are 2.7 Problems and solutions basically determined by subsistence production, and a non-monetary exchange system between commu- Physical constraints due to bad sea and weather nity members, complemented by more or less occa- conditions, fish and turtle grazing, epiphytic out- sional activities to earn income when needed. Train- breaks and lack of space for future expansion of ing and assistance are required to acquaint seaweed existing or new farming sites were considered as farmers with the fact that seaweed farming requires limiting factors where little could be done. Areas a certain cash flow to cover material and operating subject to regular strong currents would always costs, to provide for times when production is unfa- involve a high loss of production, as seaweed vourable, and to meet annual household and farm- would be washed off lines. Severe fish grazing ing needs in relation to income earned. does not allow the establishment of farms in the area, while seasonal fish grazing may be accept- Government plans call to ensure a continuous sup- able within limits. ply of high quality farming materials even at remote SPC Women in Fisheries Information Bulletin #21 – December 2010 9 sites such as Wagina, include establishing a knowl- of a potentially high value fishery (bêche-de-mer) edge and operational base on seaweed production prompts the exit of seaweed farmers, particular material suppliers globally (MFRM 2009). The im- those with small annual production capacity. But provement of farming material may also address experiences have also shown that with the decline the substitution of local mangrove and native tree of bêche-de-mer resources, limited capacity of com- resources by imported material, or at least training mercial coastal finfisheries, little if any commercial and advice to improve efficiency in the use of local copra production potential and declining lobster wood resources. Future plans should also address resources, continuity of participation and the pro- the safe disposal of old farming materials on iso- portion of households engaged in seaweed farming lated production sites. have both increased. In fact, recent information con- firms that seaweed farmers in Wagina reached their In addition, a number of observations were made target production of 50 tonnes of dried seaweed for during the survey that need attention, to make fu- the first time in October 2009 (Solomon Star 2010). ture improvements in Wagina and possibly other Given the current socio-economic conditions on seaweed farming communities. Family members Wagina, and taking into account that local commer- involved in seaweed farming are often away from cial fishery resources have significantly declined if their family and community for extended periods, they have not been exhausted, the future potential if they decide to have their children benefit from for continuous and increasing seaweed production school education. In that case, either children are on the island is likely (Preston et al. 2009). placed under the care of another family member, and separated from their parents, or the mother Results obtained from the socio-economic analy- stays behind to care for the school children. But sis suggest that seaweed farming is a non-gender caring for school children then competes with the biased activity that involves all members of the mother’s participation in seaweed farming, and household in all production and marketing ac- may reduce the family revenues. Families may also tivities. The study also revealed that women have decide that children can participate in seaweed equal chances to benefit from the cash revenues farming, which means that they leave school at an from dried seaweed sales, as this income is mainly early stage, and no longer have access to secondary allocated and advocated by the couple heading the and perhaps tertiary education. household, or by women rather than men. Positive correlation suggests that the more women of the Gardening, a socially not highly regarded activity household are involved in seaweed production, among Gilbertese, and culturally not an important the higher the income. component of the lives of people in mainly atoll environments, was easily abandoned when cash While seaweed farming has also triggered reduction flow was improved with seaweed farming. The in finfishing and bêche-de-mer fisheries, mostly ac- reported perceived benefits of substituting grown counted for by men in the community, it has also garden vegetables and fresh fish, with canned and helped to reduce women’s gardening activities. The processed food are highly questionable, financially, reduction of fishing pressure on wild-caught coast- however. Prices paid for canned fish and pork meat al resources is among the desired effects of aquacul- at the local shops, compared with a local average ture projects. However, it may be argued that a re- price for fresh fish (average between farm-gate price duced supply of garden produce, and substitution paid for commercial finfishers by Kauai Tete family of fresh crops with canned or processed food items and at the local market on Wagina) are between 6.7 may have negative nutritious consequences for sea- to 7.7 times higher than fresh finfish. By compari- weed farming households . son, a pack of local cigarettes cost between SI$21 and SI$25, and smoking, as well as the chewing of The fact that traditionally, women are charged with bethel nut, is common among men and women. family and households chores, may explain that on average, women’s total annual time input in the 3. Conclusions household’s seaweed farming activities is almost 70% less than that of men. While no gender dif- Seaweed farming has proved a viable source of in- ference was found in participation in all farming come for households on Wagina Island taking into activities, men account for a higher proportion of account that alternative and competing income the physically demanding packing of the dried sea- opportunities are limited. While farm sizes and weed crop. consequently annual production vary consider- ably, an average annual production of > 3 tonnes The most obvious social constraints associated with is considered as a production level that may allow seaweed farming on Wagina arise from the role of the investment in motorised boat transport. Expe- parents, in particular mothers and formal school- riences since 2004, when activities of the CoSPSI ing of children. The geographical distance between Project started, have demonstrated that the opening family homes on the island, and production sites 10 SPC Women in Fisheries Information Bulletin #21 – December 2010 that require seaweed farming household members References and further reading to spend extended periods away from home, limit women’s participation in the farming, or separate Kronen M., Ponia B., Pickering T., Teitelbaum A., children from their parents, or deprive children Meloti A., Kama J., Kenilolerie P., Diake S. and from schooling as they become engaged in seaweed Ngwaerobo J. 2010. Socio-economic dimen- farming if accompanying their parents to produc- sions of seaweed farming in the Solomon Is- tion sites. lands. Technical Report. Secretariat of the Pa- cific Community, Aquaculture Division, Food Overall, long-term socio-economic stability on Wa- and Agricultural Organization (FAO), Nou- gina also requires improved financial management mea, New Caledonia, January 2010. for seaweed producing households to ensure con- Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Resources. 2009. tinuous production and cash flow, to effectively ad- Solomon Islands aquaculture development dress environmental problems, in particular use of plan 2009-2014. Noumea, New Caledonia: Sec- local mangrove and native timber resources, and retariat of the Pacific Community. the environmentally sound disposal of farming ma- Solomon Star. 2010. Pacific Islands Report: Solo- terial waste by communities. The sound provision mon’s seaweed farmers celebrate har- of high quality farming material and guaranteed vest. http://www.solomonstarnews.com/ inter-cargo shipping services at acceptable cost, sta- Retrieved from the Internet 12 March 2010. bility of beach prices for dried seaweed crops, pro- Pickering T. 2005. Advances in seaweed aquacul- vision of training in improved farming techniques, ture among Pacific Island countries (updated and export marketing stability, are the required pre- October 2005). Presentation to the Secretariat of requisites on a national scale for successful seaweed the Pacific Community sub-regional seaweed production long term. meeting, 25-27 October 2005, Nadi, Fiji. Preston G.L., Tiroba G. and Robertson M. 2009. Acknowledgments Stabex Project Number ST 98/009: Commer- cialisation of seaweed production in Solomon The authors wish to acknowledge the support of Islands. Completion Report. Solomon Island the various organisations which enabled the field Department of Fisheries and Marine Resourc- survey, analysis and reporting. This review was es. European Commission. initiated and funded through the UN Food and Secretariat of the Pacific Community. 1996. Com- Agriculture Organization, Fisheries & Aquacul- munity marine conservation and fisheries en- ture Economics & Policy Division, Rome, Italy. The terprise development in the Arnavon Islands, field survey, analysis and reporting was carried out Solomon Islands. Twenty-Sixth Regional Tech- under the auspices of the Secretariat of the Pacific nical Meeting on Fisheries, Noumea, New Cal- Community, Fisheries, Aquaculture and Marine edonia, 5-9 August 1996. SPC/Fisheries 26/ Ecology Division, Noumea, New Caledonia, which Information Paper 33. 3 August 1996. provided additional funding, technical advice and The Nature Conservancy. 1998. Biodiversity Con- logistical support. We acknowledge the generous servation Network. 18. Fish from the Arnavon support of the Ministry of Fisheries and Marine Re- Island Marine Reserve. http://www.world- sources, Aquaculture Division, Honiara, Solomon wildlife.org/bsp/bcn/learning/ar97/97_ar- Islands, which provided local counterparts and in- navon18.htm Retrieved from the Internet 11 valuable support. Last but not least we would like October 2010. to warmly thank the people on Wagina who shared Tiroba G. and McHugh D.J. 2006. Solomon Islands – their knowledge and experiences with us. country report. p. 47–53. In: McHugh, D.J. (ed). The seaweed industry in the Pacific Islands. Canberra: Australian Centre for International Agricultural Research.